Table of Contents
Introduction: The Inheritance of Irrelevance
The air in my new office felt heavy, static.
It was my first day as Chief Learning Officer at a company that prided itself on its legacy, but from my vantage point on the 14th floor, that legacy felt less like a foundation and more like an anchor.
The L&D department I had just inherited was an artifact, a perfectly preserved specimen from a bygone era of corporate life.
My team was busy—calendars were filled with course development meetings, and reports were meticulously compiled—but it was the frenetic, aimless energy of a ship’s crew rowing hard in the wrong direction.
They were utterly disconnected from the business’s pulse.
My first two weeks were a “listening tour,” a series of carefully orchestrated conversations across the business that quickly devolved into a chronicle of dysfunction.
I was searching for green shoots of potential, but what I found was a desert of deep-seated problems, a landscape that gave stark, human form to the damning statistics I knew all too well.
The industry data was grim.
Research rooted in Hermann Ebbinghaus’s foundational work on memory shows that without immediate application, we forget as much as 75% of what we learn in just six days, a figure that can climb to a staggering 90% within a week.1
Other studies were even more direct, concluding that a mere 12% of employees ever apply the new skills from typical L&D programs to their jobs.1
My tour confirmed that our organization was a textbook example of this failure.
A conversation with a senior VP of Operations crystallized the issue.
He was a straight-talker, a man who measured his world in cycle times and output, and he had little patience for my department’s offerings.
“Elena,” he said, leaning forward across his desk, his voice a low, confidential rumble, “your team is great.
They’re responsive.
But the training? It’s a checkbox we have to tick for compliance.
It’s an event.
My people go, they sit, they click, and then they come back to their real jobs.” He paused, choosing his words carefully.
“It’s irrelevant.
It doesn’t help them solve the problems they face today, and it certainly doesn’t prepare them for the ones they’ll face tomorrow.”
His words echoed what I was hearing everywhere.
Our training was seen as overcomplicated, lecture-based, and devoid of the experiential learning that actually embeds knowledge.1
Employees disliked it because it felt like a bureaucratic hurdle, not a genuine opportunity to advance their careers.4
It was training for the sake of training, a solution in search of a problem.
The consequences were predictable and dire.
When training is ineffective, it doesn’t just fail to help; it actively hurts.
It breeds frustration and erodes confidence, leading to decreased morale and productivity.5
A staggering 74% of employees report feeling they aren’t reaching their full potential precisely because of this lack of meaningful development opportunities.3
And the most talented among them don’t stick around; studies show 40% of employees who receive poor training leave their jobs within the first year.6
We weren’t just failing to upskill our people; we were actively, if unintentionally, pushing our best talent out the door.
The final stop on my tour was the CFO’s office.
He didn’t mince words.
He held up my department’s budget, a document filled with line items for learning management systems (LMS), third-party content licenses, and instructor fees.
“I see we spend, on average, $1,286 per employee on training every year,” he stated, his tone neutral but the question hanging in the air.6
“Can you show me the return on that investment?” I couldn’t.
Not in a language he understood.
I had reports showing course completion rates and “smile sheets” with positive feedback, but I had no data linking our activities to a single meaningful business outcome.7
In his world of balance sheets and P&L statements, my department wasn’t a strategic asset; it was a significant, unaccountable cost center.8
The conversation was a stark reminder that while my team was tracking activity, the rest of the business was tracking value.
That evening, I sat alone in my office, the city lights beginning to glitter outside my window.
I stared at the mountain of reports on my desk, each one a testament to our industrious irrelevance.
We were hitting our targets for course delivery, yet morale was low, productivity was stagnant, and our leaders saw us as a financial drain.
The problem, I realized with a sudden, chilling clarity, wasn’t that my team was failing at its job.
The problem was that the job itself—the very concept of traditional, top-down corporate training—was a fundamentally broken model.
My inheritance wasn’t just a department; it was a failed paradigm.
And my mission was not to improve it, but to replace it.
Part I: The Diagnosis – Mapping the Cost Center
To dismantle a broken system, you must first understand its architecture.
I needed a framework, a diagnostic map that could explain not just what was wrong, but why our efforts were so profoundly misaligned with the business.
My search led me to a powerful model that classifies L&D functions into four distinct operational states, charting a course from tactical order-taking to strategic value creation.8
It was the lens I needed to diagnose our condition and, more importantly, to show my team the path O.T.
The framework divides L&D departments into two broad categories: learning-focused and business-focused.
The former, where my department was firmly entrenched, contains two models: the “Order Taker” and the “Learning Enabler.”
The Order Taker model was a painfully accurate reflection of our daily reality.
Operating under the implicit motto, “If you want it, we’ve got it,” an Order Taker’s primary function is to provide a catalog of formal learning solutions to match client demand.8
We were service providers, fulfilling requests from business units for courses on everything from spreadsheet skills to compliance refreshers.
Our focus was purely operational: manage the LMS, schedule the sessions, track the attendance.
We offered no complex training analysis, no deep strategic consultation.
Our measure of success was participation numbers and costs, which meant our primary value proposition to management was taking the administrative burden of training off their hands.8
The glaring disadvantage, as the CFO had so pointedly reminded me, was the near-total absence of any evaluation that could demonstrate business impact.
We were, by definition, a cost center, our existence justified only by an overview of expenses versus the number of employees who clicked “complete”.8
Slightly up the maturity curve lies the Learning Enabler.
This was the aspirational state for the most ambitious members of my team.
A Learning Enabler moves beyond simple fulfillment and offers educational advice as its core service.8
This model is more professionalized; it organizes intake, conducts needs analyses, and uses established evaluation frameworks like the Kirkpatrick and Phillips models to measure effectiveness.8
The Learning Enabler engages in a dialogue with the client, attempting to match the learning solution to the target group’s needs and the organization’s broader priorities.
Yet, as I studied this model, I recognized a subtle but critical trap.
While the Learning Enabler speaks the language of learning science, it still struggles to speak the language of business.
The research was clear: even with more sophisticated methods, a Learning Enabler finds it difficult to demonstrate tangible business impact in more than 20% of its initiatives.8
They remain dependent on the client’s decision to move forward and are often pressured into providing formal training even when it’s not the right solution.
Consequently, senior management still perceives the Learning Enabler as a cost center.8
It was a more professional, more sophisticated, more expensive version of what we were already doing.
It was a strategic dead end.
This realization was pivotal.
It explained why so many L&D departments feel like they are spinning their wheels.
They invest in becoming better Learning Enablers—hiring instructional designers, implementing better evaluation models—without realizing that they are merely optimizing a flawed paradigm.
They are perfecting their focus on the “10%” of learning that happens in formal settings, while the vast majority of skill development—the 70% that comes from on-the-job experience and the 20% from coaching and peer interaction—happens outside their purview.6
Our department’s failure was a direct and inevitable consequence of its myopic focus on that ineffective 10%.
Armed with this clarity, I called a meeting with my leadership team.
I didn’t present a litany of our failures.
Instead, I drew a large four-quadrant matrix on the whiteboard and walked them through the models.
I wanted them to see what I saw: that our problem wasn’t a lack of effort, but a flawed operational charter.
The table below summarizes the framework I shared, a tool that served as both our diagnosis and the first draft of our escape plan.
Table 1: The L&D Maturity Matrix: From Cost Center to Value Creator
| Operational Dimension | Order Taker | Learning Enabler | Performance Enabler | Value Creator |
| Core Mandate | Fulfill Training Requests | Provide Professional Learning Solutions | Improve Team & Individual Performance | Drive Measurable Business & Strategic Value |
| Primary Activities | Manage Course Catalog, Schedule Training | Conduct Needs Analysis, Design Curriculum | Performance Consulting, Workflow Integration | Co-create Strategic Solutions, Build Ecosystem |
| Key Metrics | Participation, Completion Rates, Cost | Kirkpatrick Levels 1-3, Learner Satisfaction | Business Unit KPIs, Performance Improvement | Strategic Goal Attainment, ROI, Market Impact |
| Relationship to Business | Reactive Service Provider | Proactive Educational Advisor | Collaborative Partner | Indispensable Strategic Partner |
| C-Suite Perception | Cost Center | Cost Center | Revenue Enabler / Performance Driver | Revenue Center / Value Driver |
| Primary Focus (70:20:10) | Focused on the 10% (Formal Training) | Focused on the 10%, with some 20% | Focused on the 70% & 20% | Leverages the full 70:20:10 spectrum |
Watching my team absorb the information on the whiteboard was a profound moment.
The initial defensiveness in the room slowly gave way to dawning recognition.
They saw themselves in the “Order Taker” column.
They recognized their aspirations—and their frustrations—in the “Learning Enabler” column.
For the first time, we had a shared language to describe our predicament.
We weren’t just “busy.” We were operating as a cost center in a business that demanded value.
And for the first time, the path to becoming something more—a Performance Enabler, a Value Creator—was not an abstract ideal, but a defined destination on a map.
The diagnosis was complete.
The real work of the architect was about to begin.
Part II: The Epiphany – The Shift from Training to Learning
The diagnosis was a necessary but insufficient step.
Knowing we were trapped in a cost-center model was one thing; figuring out how to break free was another entirely.
The answer, I knew, wouldn’t be found by looking at traditional L&D playbooks.
The solution required a fundamental paradigm shift, an epiphany that would change not just what we did, but how we thought about our very purpose.
That epiphany came to me not in a boardroom, but on a weekend walk through a part of the city I rarely visited.
It was a neighborhood teeming with life—a chaotic, vibrant, and beautiful mess of old brick walk-ups, gleaming new glass condos, tiny bakeries, independent bookstores, and bustling public squares.
People were everywhere, interacting, working, living.
It struck me that this neighborhood was a perfect living system.
It wasn’t designed by a single, top-down master plan; it had evolved organically over time, a rich tapestry of mixed uses and diverse inhabitants.
My mind immediately went to the work of the great urban thinker Jane Jacobs.
In her seminal book, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, Jacobs railed against the sterile, top-down urban renewal projects of her time—vast, uniform housing projects and sprawling highways that bulldozed the complex, messy fabric of city life.12
She argued that these projects, conceived by planners with a bird’s-eye view, failed because they ignored the intricate, ground-level “sidewalk ballet” of human interaction that makes a neighborhood safe, prosperous, and alive.14
A healthy city, she contended, was not an orderly machine but a living ecosystem, generated by four conditions: mixed primary uses, short blocks for permeability, buildings of various ages, and density.14
Walking through that vibrant neighborhood, I realized that my L&D department was behaving like one of Jacobs’s misguided 1950s urban planners.
We were designing sterile, one-size-fits-all “training projects”—our eLearning modules and workshops—and imposing them on the organization from on high.
We were ignoring the rich, organic, and far more effective learning that was already happening in the “streets” of the company—in team meetings, in mentorship conversations, in the trial-and-error of daily work.
We weren’t building a vibrant community; we were bulldozing it to make way for orderly, ineffective structures.
The epiphany was this: our goal should not be to build better training programs.
Our goal must be to architect a thriving learning ecosystem.
A learning ecosystem, as I came to define it, is not a single technology or platform.
It is a complex, adaptive system of people, content, technology, culture, and strategy, existing both inside and outside the organization, that collectively supports both formal and informal learning.15
It is a shift from viewing learning as an “event” to viewing it as an environment.
It’s the corporate equivalent of a Jane Jacobs-esque city: diverse, interconnected, and centered on the lived experience of its inhabitants.
This new mental model fundamentally changed my approach.
My next meeting was with our CEO. But this time, I didn’t go to defend my budget or ask for more resources.
I went to make a gambit.
I had spent a week doing a deep dive into the company’s three-year strategic plan.
I opened the meeting not by talking about L&D, but by talking about his strategy.
I put his key objectives on the screen: “Increase market share in the Asia-Pacific region by 15%,” “Reduce customer churn by 10%,” “Launch three new flagship products.”
Then, I pivoted.
“Here are the critical capabilities our people need to achieve these goals,” I said, mapping out skills like cross-cultural sales negotiation, advanced customer success management, and agile product development.
“And here,” I continued, “are the current gaps in those capabilities across the organization.
These gaps don’t just represent a training need; they represent a direct and material risk to our ability to execute our strategy.”
In that moment, I changed the conversation.
I was no longer the CLO asking for money for training.
I was a strategic advisor, using the lens of human capability to de-risk the company’s most important goals.16
This is the core principle of the two most advanced L&D business models: the
Performance Enabler and the Value Creator.10
A Performance Enabler focuses on helping teams and individuals work better and make continuous improvements, directly aligning with operational priorities.
A Value Creator takes this a step further, co-creating solutions with senior management to implement the organization’s strategic priorities and make a measurable contribution to organizational performance.10
I was no longer talking about learning; I was talking about performance and value.
I positioned my department not as a peripheral support function, but as a trusted partner whose insights were indispensable for strategic success.16
The CEO’s posture changed.
He wasn’t looking at me as a department head, but as a fellow executive.
He saw the power in reframing the L&D function from a cost to be managed to an engine of strategic enablement.
This shift in perspective is the most critical competency for any modern CLO.
It requires deep business savvy and the strategic acumen to connect the dots between people, skills, and business outcomes.17
I left that meeting with something far more valuable than a bigger budget.
I left with executive buy-in for a new vision.
My gambit had paid off.
I had a mandate not just to fix a broken department, but to architect a new way for our entire organization to learn, adapt, and grow.
The blueprint for that ecosystem was beginning to take shape.
Part III: The Blueprint – Architecting the Value-Creation Engine
With a new vision and executive backing, the time for theory was over.
It was time to build.
The transformation from a reactive “Order Taker” to a proactive “Value Creator” couldn’t happen overnight.
It required a phased, deliberate approach—a blueprint for architecting our new learning ecosystem, measuring its impact, and embedding a culture of continuous development into the very fabric of the organization.
Phase 1: Securing Strategic Alignment & Early Wins (Becoming a Performance Enabler)
Our first move had to be a decisive break from the past.
My team’s default reflex was to wait for a “training request.” I issued a new directive: we would no longer be reactive.
Instead, we would become performance detectives.10
We proactively partnered with the Customer Service division, a key business unit whose performance metrics—specifically, average call handling time and first-call resolution rate—had been stagnant for two quarters.
Instead of proposing a generic “customer service training” course, we embedded two of my best people with their team for a week.
They observed workflows, listened in on calls, and interviewed top-performing agents.
They discovered the problem wasn’t a lack of knowledge about our products; it was a lack of confidence and skill in de-escalating tense conversations and quickly diagnosing complex issues under pressure.
Our solution was a targeted, blended intervention that deliberately minimized formal “classroom” time.
We focused on the 70% (on-the-job experience) and the 20% (social learning).
We created a series of two-minute microlearning videos demonstrating best-practice de-escalation phrases, accessible on-demand via their tablets.
We implemented a peer coaching system where high-performers were given a small amount of protected time each week to mentor junior colleagues.
Drawing inspiration from the innovative L&D practices at companies like Box, we introduced a gamified challenge: agents earned points and badges for successfully applying the new techniques, with top performers recognized in weekly team huddles.19
And mirroring the approach at
Appian, managers used data from the system to create personalized coaching pathways for each team member during their one-on-one meetings.19
Crucially, we measured success not by how many agents completed the training, but by the business unit’s own KPIs.
Within six weeks, the average call handling time had decreased by 18%, and the first-call resolution rate had climbed by 22%.
We had our first concrete, undeniable ROI win.
We had stopped selling training and started delivering performance.
Phase 2: Building the Ecosystem Infrastructure
This early win was the political capital I needed for the next phase: a significant investment in our technology infrastructure.
Our old, compliance-focused Learning Management System (LMS) was a digital filing cabinet, designed to push content out and track completions.
It was an anchor holding us in the “Order Taker” world.
To build a true ecosystem, we needed a modern, flexible, and learner-centric foundation.
In my business case to the executive committee, I presented our Customer Service pilot as Exhibit A.
Then, I scaled up the argument with powerful industry data.
I showed them that companies with comprehensive, well-integrated training programs don’t just see small gains; they achieve 218% higher income per employee and have profit margins that are 24% higher than competitors who don’t invest strategically in L&d+.6
This wasn’t a cost; it was a proven driver of profitability.
To make the vision tangible, I presented two in-depth case studies of companies that had successfully made this transition.
First, Caterpillar (CAT).
Historically, CAT’s dealer training was product-focused, pushing content out to learners.
Recognizing this was ineffective, their Global Dealer Learning team initiated a transformation by asking a simple question: “What do our learners need?”.20
This led to the creation of a Learning Organizational Maturity Model (LOMM) that mapped career progression and allowed them to tailor content to specific roles and development needs.
They moved beyond a single LMS to build a true ecosystem with multiple integrated tools: a YouTube-like app powered by Kaltura for video, an app for purchased content, and an Inkling app for in-house creation.
This multi-tool environment supported a collaborative culture where employees could even create and share their own user-generated videos, providing the L&D team with real-time insights into knowledge gaps.20
CAT’s journey demonstrated the power of shifting from a product-centric to a learner-centric strategy and building a flexible tech stack to support it.
Second, XP Inc., a rapidly growing Brazilian financial services firm.
XP found itself in a familiar trap: its traditional LMS was built for mandatory compliance training and was incapable of supporting a modern learning culture.21
As a company that prided itself on hiring experts, they realized they needed a system that would empower those experts to share knowledge.
Their vision was radical: L&D would not own learning; the people themselves would.
After a meticulous discovery process, they chose Valamis, an end-to-end learning platform.
The new system, “Campus XP,” integrated formal training, asynchronous and synchronous learning, and social features like forums and wikis into a single, user-friendly interface.
Employees could now easily create and share their own content to upskill their teams.
The results were astounding, achieving a Net Promoter Score of 87%.
XP’s story was a powerful testament to how the right technology, when aligned with a culture of empowerment and knowledge sharing, can unleash the collective intelligence of an organization.21
These cases, combined with our own pilot success, made the argument compelling.
We were not just buying new software; we were investing in a new operating model for talent development.
The following table, which I presented to the committee, starkly illustrated the choice we were making.
Table 2: Traditional L&D vs. The Learning Ecosystem
| Characteristic | Traditional L&D (The Silo) | The Learning Ecosystem (The Network) |
| Core Technology | Learning Management System (LMS) | Learning Experience Platform (LXP), AI, Performance Support Tools, Social Platforms |
| Content Strategy | Top-down, formal, monolithic courses | Mix of micro, macro, curated, and user-generated content |
| Learner Experience | Prescribed, passive, “one-size-fits-all” | Personalized, active, “just-for-me,” in the flow of work |
| Primary Modality | Event-based (classroom, scheduled eLearning) | Continuous, on-demand, just-in-time |
| Source of Knowledge | Central L&D department | Distributed network of experts, peers, and managers |
| Measurement of Success | Activity Metrics (Completions, Scores, Hours) | Impact Metrics (Performance, Retention, Productivity, ROI) |
The committee approved the plan.
We had the green light to build our infrastructure, selecting a suite of tools that prioritized personalization, social collaboration, and robust analytics, similar to the offerings from modern learning providers like ELB Learning and LinkedIn Learning.22
Phase 3: Fostering a Learning Culture & Measuring True ROI (Becoming a Value Creator)
Technology is only an enabler; culture is the engine.
With our new ecosystem infrastructure in place, the final and most crucial phase was to ignite a genuine culture of continuous learning across the entire organization.
We needed to make learning not something that was done to our employees, but something that was done by and with them.
Our flagship initiative was directly inspired by Siemens’ “SkillUP! Challenge”.24
We launched the “Growth Quest,” a quarter-long, company-wide campaign.
We used gamification elements like points, badges, and leaderboards to drive engagement.22
Teams competed against each other, and individuals were encouraged to share their learnings on our internal social channels using a dedicated hashtag.
We leveraged the platform’s AI to curate personalized learning paths aligned with our 12 strategic “power skills,” but also gave employees the freedom to explore any topic they wished, fostering the kind of self-directed learning championed by companies like
ITX.19
We even borrowed a page from
Acorns, integrating a “mental wellness” track and rewarding participation in both professional and personal development courses.19
The most significant change, however, was in how we measured and reported our success.
The old L&D dashboard, with its vanity metrics of completion rates and training hours, was retired permanently.
In its place, we built a “Value Creation Dashboard” for the C-suite.
This new dashboard told a holistic story of business impact, tracking a portfolio of metrics designed to resonate with each executive.
- For the CFO: We tracked the financial impact, highlighting improvements in the metrics that showed a clear return on investment, such as the 24% higher profit margin and 218% higher income per employee associated with comprehensive training programs.6
- For the COO: We tracked operational efficiency, showing the 37% increase in productivity that effective training can drive, as well as improvements in role-specific KPIs and time-to-competence for new hires.6
- For the CHRO: We tracked talent metrics, demonstrating our impact on the employee lifecycle. We showed how our initiatives were improving employee retention (94% of employees say they’d stay longer at a company that invests in their development), engagement, and the internal mobility rate.6
This portfolio approach was our final evolution into a “Value Creator.” We were no longer defending our budget based on activity; we were demonstrating our value based on business results.
We were speaking the language of the C-suite, proving that a well-architected learning ecosystem wasn’t a cost center, but one of the most powerful levers for driving sustainable, long-term growth.
Conclusion: The Living Blueprint
Two years have passed since I first walked into that quiet office on the 14th floor.
The air is different now.
There’s a palpable hum of energy, but it’s no longer the aimless churn of a forgotten department.
It’s the vibrant, purposeful energy of a strategic hub.
My team members are no longer order takers; they are performance consultants, data analysts, and community managers.
They are architects of a living, breathing learning ecosystem.
The “sidewalk ballet” that Jane Jacobs so eloquently described is now a daily reality within our organization.
I see it in the Yammer channels where engineers share their own micro-learning videos on new coding techniques.
I see it in the sales team’s virtual leaderboards, where they compete on applying new negotiation skills.
I see it in the data from our LXP, which shows a project team accessing just-in-time resources on agile methodology moments before a critical sprint planning session.
Learning is no longer a destination; it is the way we travel.
Our journey is far from over.
The landscape for L&D leaders is one of perpetual evolution.
The challenges looming for 2025 and beyond are already on our radar: the strategic adoption of AI not just as a tool but as a collaborative partner, the need to combat digital learning fatigue in a hybrid world, and the constant pressure to demonstrate clear ROI amidst economic uncertainty.27
But these are not threats to be feared; they are the next frontier for the Value Creator to conquer.
Because we have built a resilient, adaptive system, we are positioned to tackle these challenges head-on.
My message to my peers—the Chief Learning Officers, the VPs of Talent, the CHROs who find themselves inheriting their own version of my old department—is this: the safety of the “Order Taker” model is an illusion.
Continuing to manage a cost center in a world that demands value is the riskiest proposition of all.
The future belongs to the architects, to those who have the courage to make the gambit.
You must reframe your function, not as a cost to be managed, but as the primary engine for building an adaptable, resilient, and future-ready organization.
You must shift the conversation from the cost of training to the strategic risk of not developing your people.
In an era of constant disruption, a mature, business-integrated learning ecosystem is not a “nice-to-have.” It is the most critical competitive advantage an organization can build.
It is the strategic moat that will separate the companies that thrive from those that merely survive.
The blueprint I have shared is not a static document to be copied, but a living model for continuous evolution.
The time to start building is now.
Works cited
- Why Many Training Programs Fall Short — And How to Fix Them, accessed August 8, 2025, https://trainingindustry.com/articles/content-development/why-many-training-programs-fall-short-and-how-to-fix-them/
- Employees forget 90% of training within 1 week – here’s how to fix it [Speach Method], accessed August 8, 2025, https://speach.me/blog/employees-forget-90-of-training-within-1-week-heres-how-to-fix-it-speach-method
- The 20 Most Important Corporate Training Statistics for 2025 – Edstellar, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.edstellar.com/blog/corporate-training-statistics
- 8 Reasons Why Most Online Corporate Training Fails, accessed August 8, 2025, https://knowledgeanywhere.com/articles/eight-reasons-why-most-online-corporate-training-fails/
- 5 Ways Ineffective Training Hurts Companies | Walden University, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.waldenu.edu/online-masters-programs/ms-in-human-resource-management/resource/five-ways-ineffective-training-hurts-companies
- Employee Training Statistics: The Must-Know Trends and Data – BuildEmpire, accessed August 8, 2025, https://buildempire.co.uk/employee-training-statistics/
- Common challenges companies face when evaluating the effectiveness of their corporate training programs include – Talent Sapphire Pvt.Ltd, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.talentsapphire.com/posts/common-challenges-companies-face-when-evaluating-the-effectiveness-of-their-corporate-training-programs-include
- New Business Models for L&D – Association for Talent Development, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.td.org/content/atd-blog/new-business-models-for-l-d
- An Alternative Way to Assess the ROI of e-Learning in Training – Lambda Solutions, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.lambdasolutions.net/en/blog/an-alternative-way-to-assess-the-roi-of-e-learning-in-training
- 4 Business Models That Redefine L&D With 70:20:10 – eLearning Industry, accessed August 8, 2025, https://elearningindustry.com/4-business-models-redefine-learning-and-development-with-70-20-10
- Employee Training Statistics, Trends, and Data in 2025 – Devlin Peck, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.devlinpeck.com/content/employee-training-statistics
- The Death and Life of Great American Cities by Jane Jacobs | EBSCO Research Starters, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/literature-and-writing/death-and-life-great-american-cities-jane-jacobs
- Book review: “The Death and Life of Great American Cities” by Jane Jacobs, accessed August 8, 2025, https://patricktreardon.com/book-review-the-death-and-life-of-great-american-cities-by-jane-jacobs/
- The Death and Life of Great American Cities – Wikipedia, accessed August 8, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Death_and_Life_of_Great_American_Cities
- What is a Learning Ecosystem? And How Does it Support Corporate Strategy? – HSI, accessed August 8, 2025, https://hsi.com/blog/what-is-a-learning-ecosystem-and-how-does-it-support-corporate-strategy
- The strategic L&D blueprint: leveraging LearnOps for competitive advantage -, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.trainingjournal.com/2024/content-type/features/the-strategic-ld-blueprint-leveraging-learnops-for-competitive-advantage/
- So, You Want to Be a Chief Learning Officer? – ATD, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.td.org/content/atd-blog/so-you-want-to-be-a-chief-learning-officer
- Chief Learning Officer – AIHR, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.aihr.com/hr-career-map/chief-learning-officer/
- 10 Companies with Innovative L&D Best Practices | Udemy for …, accessed August 8, 2025, https://blog.udemy.com/10-companies-with-innovative-ld-best-practices/
- xAPI Case Study | Caterpillar | Watershed Learning Analytics, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.watershedlrs.com/case-studies/manufacturing/caterpillar-xapi/
- Case Study by The Josh Bersin Company: XP Adopts a Customer-Centric Approach to Build an End-to-End Learning Ecosystem – Learning News, accessed August 8, 2025, https://learningnews.com/news/valamis/2022/xp-adopts-a-customer-centric-approach-to-build-an-end-to-end-learning-ecosystem
- Case Studies | Real-World L&D Success Stories – ELB Learning, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.elblearning.com/case-studies
- Online Learning Case Studies | LinkedIn Learning Solutions, accessed August 8, 2025, https://learning.linkedin.com/elearning-case-studies
- Siemens Case Study | LinkedIn Talent Solutions – LinkedIn Learning, accessed August 8, 2025, https://learning.linkedin.com/elearning-case-studies/siemens
- 17 Training and Development Metrics and KPIs – Voxy, accessed August 8, 2025, https://voxy.com/blog/training-and-development-metrics/
- How to Measure the Success of Learning & Development: 12 Important Metrics to Evaluate, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.optimussbr.com/insights/topic/learning-development/how-to-measure-the-success-of-learning-and-development-12-important-metrics-to-evaluate/
- The 5 most pressing challenges for Chief Learning Officers in 2025 | InStride, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.instride.com/insights/chief-learning-officer-challenges/
- The Future Of L&D: Tackling Emerging Trends And Obstacles In 2025 – eLearning Industry, accessed August 8, 2025, https://elearningindustry.com/the-future-of-ld-tackling-emerging-trends-and-obstacles-in-2025
- The 5 Most Pressing Challenges for Chief Learning Officers in 2025 – Core Competency, accessed August 8, 2025, https://corecompetency.net/insights/the-5-most-pressing-challenges-for-chief-learning-officers-in-2025/
- The Top Priorities for Chief Learning and Talent Officers So Far in 2025 – iVentiv, accessed August 8, 2025, https://iventiv.com/news/the-top-priorities-for-chief-learning-and-talent-officers-so-far-in-2025
